The implementation of corporate language policies is widely regarded as a strategy for improving communication and coordination across globally dispersed organizations. However, employees who experience a mismatch between the corporate language and their competencies or job requirements may resist the policy or attempt to change it, as documented in existing language-sensitive international business research. Nevertheless, the long-term effects of resistance against a language policy initiative have yet to be explored. We applied a two-year qualitative study following the top management’s decision to use English as a corporate language in a Danish organization. Results showed that discrepancies between external job requirements and policy directions were used by employees as a source of power to legitimize reinterpretations of the policy leading to a language destandardization process with important consequences for the organization. These findings contribute to literature on language policy implementations by describing how negotiated reactions change the practice of a policy. • Language destandardization emerges as a natural organizational response to the misalignment between top-down language standardization policies and the actual language needs of diverse departments. • Task functionality serves as a powerful justification for resistance to language standardization, with employees invoking practical job requirements to challenge and reinterpret policy implementation. • The implementation of a common corporate language policy reveals a spectrum of departmental reactions, from full embrace to complete rejection, influenced by the practical applicability of the language in specific work contexts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lauring et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: